posted at 3:51 pm on January 30, 2013 by Allahpundit

The key subplot to Rubio’s immigration push, of course, is how much of a headache it’ll be for him with conservatives in the 2016 primaries. The talk-radio charm offensive is mainly designed to get grassroots opinion-shapers like Rush to at least wait and see what the bill looks like before lobbying against it, but more broadly it’s designed to move the Overton window on what positions are acceptable for a good conservative to hold. Rubio can afford to have immigration reform fail; he can’t afford to be RINO-ized over it. Like I said yesterday, whether or not a bill ends up passing, he’s already achieved something significant by getting Rush et al. to acknowledge that “recognizing reality” in terms of a grand bargain on immigration is something “admirable and noteworthy.” No matter what happens now, unless he ends up voting for a watered-down Democratic bill with token enforcement (which he won’t), he’s got that as a soundbite for his primary ads in 2016. James Antle makes a good point too in noting that none of Rubio’s would-be rivals for the nomination have attacked him on this yet. Jindal, Paul, and Christie have all kept quiet and Ryan has actually endorsed Rubio’s plan. The likely candidates don’t want to alienate Latino voters and the pundits with big audiences don’t want to kneecap a guy who might end up being the party’s best chance to regain the presidency.

So how’s all of this playing with conservatives in the Senate and online? Is Rubiomania enough in itself to convince people to reserve judgment until the first draft bill hits the floor in March? Not yet:

“I love and respect Marco. I think he’s just amazingly naïve on this issue,” Vitter said. “This is the same old formula that we’ve dealt with before, including when it passed in 1986, and that is promises of enforcement and immediate amnesty. And of course, the promises of enforcement never materialize. The amnesty happens immediately — the millisecond the bill is signed into law, and the same is true here. No, they won’t be citizens immediately. They will be legal.”

“Citizenship is guaranteed at that point as a practical matter,” he added…

“Look, as soon as you give these people a legal status, to say that you’re going to reverse that is ridiculous,” Vitter said. “It’ll never happen. As soon as you give them a legal status, they are here legally forever and probably they’re citizens pretty darn soon after. And if Marco thinks no matter what happens or doesn’t happen on the enforcement side that’s not going to happen, I just think he’s nuts.”

Yeah, Rubio’s wisely focused on the enforcement provisions in his chats with conservative media but even if he gets Schumer et al. to bend a little on those — which I think they will, if only because enforcement can be eroded over time — he’s got the problem Vitter mentions of immediate probationary legal status for illegals who are already here. I don’t think Schumer will be as yielding about that. Neither does National Review, which opposes the bill in part on grounds that, let’s face it, there’s no way Democrats can be trusted on this issue:

[B]roader reform measures must wait until credible enforcement mechanisms are in place. Those mechanisms include, at a minimum, a physically secured border and mandatory universal use of the E-Verify system, which confirms the legal status of new hires. We agree with Senator Rubio’s view that “we can’t be the only nation in the world that does not enforce its immigration laws. . . . Modernization of the legal immigration system is impossible unless we first secure the border and implement an E-Verify system.” We very much doubt that Senator Rubio will achieve meaningful border security in cooperation with Senators Schumer, Durbin, Menendez, and Bennet. The less-of-the-same version being developed in the House with the support of John Boehner and Paul Ryan almost certainly will suffer from similar defects, since it appears to be based on the same premises…

Senator Rubio, an exemplary conservative leader, is correct that our immigration system is broken. And he is correct that, at some point, we are going to have to do something about the millions of illegals already here. But he is wrong about how to go about repairing our immigration system, and wrong to think that an amnesty-and-enforcement bill at this time will end up being anything other than the unbuttered side of a half-a-loaf deal. And there is no reason to make a bad deal for fear of losing a Latino vote Republicans never had.

If you believe, as NR does and as even some liberals acknowledge, that Latinos are likely to go on voting Democratic in the medium-term at least, then it’s perfectly rational for Democrats to go on trying to weaken border security measures in the drafting process and later, after something’s passed. (Passionate supporters of organized labor may disagree, natch.) Meanwhile, Newt Gingrich objects to the bill partly because he objects to the process:

Gingrich, who won applause for his piecemeal immigration reform package during the 2012 GOP presidential primaries, said he would not endorse the bipartisan immigration reform pushed by McCain and Rubio–and that is extremely similar to President Obama’s offering…

“Frankly, I’m pretty tired of a handful of people in Washington, starting with the president, meeting in secret meetings in closed rooms to cut giant deals to come out with a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ vote to then tell the rest of us that it will be a catastrophe if we vote ‘no.’ I think that’s really bad government and I don’t think it produces good ideas,” said Gingrich.

Read Erick Erickson and the boss emeritus for further objections. Conservatives on the Hill are evidently already worried about Rubio getting rolled by Schumer and hurting himself for 2016, but like I said, I think that’s overblown. If worse comes to worst and grassroots opinion turns decisively against the bill, Rubio will turn on it too. He’s already done most of the heavy lifting he needs to do on this issue by making himself a face of immigration reform, no matter what the eventual outcome. And no matter what you think of the bill, his media outreach effort is impressive. It’s not just Rush and Hannity he’s talking to; he came on Ed’s radio show the other day to speak directly to blog readers and he’s got an op-ed today at Red State responding to Erickson’s piece. If you think the GOP suffers from chronically poor messaging, as basically every conservative does, then take some comfort in the fact that this guy knows what he’s doing on that front even if you oppose his goal.

Here’s Coulter with Howie Carr, also in need of a lottttt of persuasion.

I like Rubio, but those are correct. If the r’s for one second thinks that the border will be secure, well a bridge someplace needs to be bought! dear sis, holder, etc will see to it that that NEVER happens and NO illegal aliens will get the boot? I don’t care what those worms say, more illegals stay than get the boot!
L

Neither does National Review, which opposes the bill in part on grounds that, let’s face it, there’s no way Democrats can be trusted on this issue

That’s the #1 reason I’m opposed to it. I respect Rubio and believe he’s sincere about wanting to deal with this issue, but he’s way too naive. What logical reason would the Dems(particularly Obama) have for following through on the border security measures? Because they gave us their word?

The only way this bill should pass is if the entire thing is tied directly to border enforcement. As in, if the border isn’t secured, the rest of the bill is automatically scrapped. Needless to say, almost no Dems and frankly many Republicans would never go for that(which I’d argue proves our point about not trusting these politicians in the first place).

As for Rubio’s 2016 prospects, I think the bill failing would actually be the best of both worlds for him. He’s given cover with Latino and liberal voters(and Univision) as he can say he led on the issue, but the support simply wasn’t there. And conservatives will forgive him since the thing ultimately didn’t pass and he did seem adamant about securing the border first.

Wow. I mean every one of those names is bantered about as a potential 2016 Republican candidate. Ooh careful treading here, Marco. All your believable possible contenders are releasing their positions even before the wind is blowing.

No amnesty, period. I want this free ride for illegals ended. No welfare, no medical, no schooling for their kids. These people have more rights than I do, more concern from the politicians and I was born here to citizens. I’ve had enough of this debate that nagging liberals haven’t yet let go. They had their chance to fix this mess in 1986 and they still haven’t. Now that it’s worse, don’t expect me to be more lenient or understanding.

Like with proposed gun bans, my answer to this scheme is a resounding ‘No!’

I support Marco Rubio’s bill, partly because I am on Team Let It Burn.

BigGator5 on January 30, 2013 at 4:02 PM

I’m on Team Let It Burn, not Team Nuclear Armageddon. Let’s allow Obama to have his tax and spend binge, but let’s not reshape the electorate to the point where conservatives will never be in power again no matter how badly the Dems F up the country.

Totally apropos is my comment from the Santelli thread:
[The U.S. is] worse than Europe even. Because we are moving headlong toward an immigrant takeover. Via democracy. When they get enough clout it will be a slippery slope where the democratic process will open the floodgates to let in the compadres of the current illegals. The socialistic U. S. of Mexico, no kidding. And full reworking of the constitution, and redistribution of assets to the low income immigrants. The U.S. taken over from the inside. Oh, I forget, we are now supposed to be all for amnesty. Don’t do it. Make the problems of illegal immigration a big issue (Romney shirked that issue!!!!), and maybe we can win because the people are upset. Otherwise we lose.
And look now more at Obamacare: “Immigration Reform could boost cost of Obamacare by hundreds of millions.” And the costs of everything. Free education, and all, for the new immigrants who are coming to take over. Unless we take a stand. Wake up. Start talking about the problem of the illegals, and the majority will back us. Otherwise we just get snowed. Don’t do it.

Also this 11 million illegal number is bull crap. Hispanics voted in the last election at 10%. Yet the cencus said they are 17% of the population. That means about 7% of the population is illegal Hispanics. That is 22 million illegal hispanics. 7% of 320 million. This doesn’t even count the illegals of other races. Or that there might be a lot more who were afraid to answer the census because they were not here legally. It could be over 30 million. Think about that when you consider that only 12 million Hispanics voted in 2012.

Rand is damn smart politically during all of this. That dude is going to be tough beat in the primary.

Nessuno on January 30, 2013 at 4:03 PM

You might be surprised by how many illegals there are in Kentucky now. Most of them are hardworking people doing jobs on farms. Much of the horse industry depends on them now. Those owners have a lot of money to back a candidate that helps them.

Hey Rubio, here’s an idea: Focus “like a laser” on JOB CREATION and getting citizens back to work. Obama is being allowed to skate on his willful destruction of our economy and the stupid GOP is worrying about pandering to the next bloc of people…

It seems Rubio is taking all of the heat for suggesting his ideas as there is no bill. Where are the others 7 and their ideas? What they and Rubio need to understand, this has nothing to do with what they are talking about.

It’s about votes for the Democrats, period. If Rubio is smart, he’d drop out of it altogether.

Enforce the existing laws, secure the border and when that is done, talk about it.

Gingrich is right by the way. This will be another Obamacare/Fiscal Cliff debacle. It will come to the floor with 3-5 minutes to vote and no one will have read the behind the doors bill.

Once again… WHY???? Why are we talking about immigration and gun control when this nation is over 16 TRILLION dollars in debt and NOTHING has been done to stop the hemorrhaging? It’s absolutely unbelievable to me that we apparently don’t have a journalist in the land to cry BS on this idiocy. There’s absolutely NO WAY that the House is going to pass Shamnesty 2.0 or legislate gun bans. So, not only do we have the usual Democrat suspects pointing and shouting “SQUIRREL!!!”… now we have GOP senators beating them to the punch.

This is ABSURD!!! Obama gets his tax increase on the so-called “rich” and all the sudden… hey, ‘problem solved’. That must be some other country’s massive frigging DEBT CLOCK ticking in the corner, right?

Honestly, what’s the point of continuing to try to get through to these morons? They’re apparently too stupid and tone-deaf to EVER get it. It just astounds me that we can’t find smarter people to send to Washington. Every time you think you find one… he turns out to be Marco Rubio in hot pursuit of acorn-caching rodentia.

If you think the GOP suffers from chronically poor messaging, as basically every conservative does, then take some comfort in the fact that this guy knows what he’s doing on that front even if you oppose his goal.

Just doing the talk show circuit is not messaging in my opinion. The heart of good messaging is a …. a good message i.e. sound policy not “I grew up around immigrants therefore everyone should listen to me.”

The talk radio audience, just like many here, can smell b.s. a mile away and I don’t think the listening audience was impressed with either Rush or Mark Levin and their Steve Croft moment with the ‘dashing young junior Senator with a pretty Cuban name.’

Vitter nailed him: NAIVE. I for one will remember that he actually thinks the Dems will enforce border security after amnesty is granted. Conservative, RINO, whatever – he’s naive and that should remove him from future leadership period.

Rand is damn smart politically during all of this. That dude is going to be tough beat in the primary.

Nessuno on January 30, 2013 at 4:03 PM

I hope so. Rand Paul is the only one I like. However, I am a disconcerted that he voted for John Kerry for Sec. of State.
I emailed his office for an explanation this am. Haven’t heard
back yet. If anyone knows the “why” I would appreciate your
posting on it.

I’ve been making the point about 2016 for weeks now. The field is basically going to agree with Rubio on this…. The field includes a Midwestern who works for Jack Kemp, the son of Indian immigrants who declared the Republican Party “stupid,” Ron Paul’s son, and a noted New Jersey moderate who is BFF’s with Obama. Which candidate pray tell will go to the right of Rubio on immigration? Bigger gamble for Rubio is that the bill doesn’t pass considering he has basically staked 2016 on this.

How about this instead Senator: All illegals willing to register themselves within six months after passage of the bill have a universal background check. If their country of origin doesn’t respond in three days, they get deported. If they come up clean, they can pay a $10,000 fine and get in the back of the line. No citizenship, only permanent residence which will only be processed after the fine is paid. Any unregistered illegals found after the six months never gets anything but deported….

Once again… WHY???? Why are we talking about immigration and gun control when this nation is over 16 TRILLION dollars in debt and NOTHING has been done to stop the hemorrhaging?

Murf76 on January 30, 2013 at 4:12 PM

You answered your own question. You think Obama or any Democrat actually wants to talk about the economy, the debt, or jobs? Their only ideas are tax more and spend more. How receptive do you think a majority of Americans will be to that?

Unless there’s a couple of years of concrete border security improvements first, Republicans are gonna get screwed on this. And since that’s never gonna happen…..Republicans are gonna get screwed on this. That’s not even addressing what to do with the illegals already in the country. This deal is already junk before we even get to that.

Still waiting for someone to ask Rubio why we can’t enforce immigration laws we already have. Maybe Rush asked him but I didn’t hear the interview.

LOL!They’re not “coming out of the shadows” they’re standing in from of Loew’s and Home Depot, waiting to be picked up and taken to their Daily Worksite. When they aren’t hassling drivers-by or shoppers.

And of course, the promises of enforcement never materialize. The amnesty happens immediately — the millisecond the bill is signed into law, and the same is true here. No, they won’t be citizens immediately. They will be legal.”

I empathize with Vitter’s point, and this is the conundrum. The Democrats are liars. But how are we EVER going to get enforcement unless it’s a standalone bill? It will never get through the present Senate. Also, just how in the hell are we supposed to find out who — and just how many — the illegals are unless we provide some sort of weak sauce incentive for them to come out of hiding?

Is that insane or what? Rubio is to the LEFT of Ann Coulter! You know, Ann Coulter who supported Willard My-Views-Are-Progressive Mitt I-Like-Mandates Romney and was totally backing up Cris Obama-Is-Awesome Christie!
I think now is the time to ask who has listed Rubio as the next conservative star?
Come on guys, self identify if you jumped on the Rubio is the next conservative superstar! We would like to know.

The 11 million “estimate” is complete B.S. The government has been using this same “estimate” for the past decade. (BTW, according to U.S. Border Patrol, illegal border crossings increased last year by about 9% — but the border is more secure than ever! says Janet Napolitano).

In 1986, the official government “estimate” of how many illegals would be eligible to receive amnesty under the bill Reagan signed was 1.1 – 1.3 million. Over 3 million (or more than twice the official government “estimate”) ended up receiving amnesty under that law.

The federal government always significantly “underestimates” the number of illegal aliens living in the U.S., for obvious reasons. Also of note, the 1986 amnesty program was rife with fraud, which the government admitted,and which the government also admitted it was powerless to stop (and made little effort to stop). It will be the same this time — except with new and improved fraud, and on a much bigger scale. For example, millions of illegal aliens who’ve been working off the books for years, being paid in cash, are now going to file and pay their back taxes? LOL. We’ll just take their word for how many years they’ve worked here illegally, and how much income they made in those years, because there will be no way to prove it. But we know that all those illegals would never lie about their tax obligations . . . because they’re all so honest and law-abiding, right?

You answered your own question. You think Obama or any Democrat actually wants to talk about the economy, the debt, or jobs? Their only ideas are tax more and spend more. How receptive do you think a majority of Americans will be to that?

Doughboy on January 30, 2013 at 4:20 PM

Exactly. And if I can see that, and you can see that, and anybody who would spend ten minutes thinking about it can see that… why the heck can a guy who had enough on the ball to get himself elected senator NOT see it???

What we need is a national campaign whereby every conservative American, who has actually paid attention to Obama’s modus operandi over the last four years, mails a printed copy of “Lucy and the Football” to Senator Marco Rubio, who… pun intended… needs to stop being a “rube”.

You might be surprised by how many illegals there are in Kentucky now. Most of them are hardworking people doing jobs on farms. Much of the horse industry depends on them now. Those owners have a lot of money to back a candidate that helps them.

rockmom on January 30, 2013 at 4:09 PM

Yep, and the law enforcement industry in Lexington and other cities in Fayette County are doing really well with the catch and release program for all of these illegals getting DUI’s.. They’re all decked out in these awesome horse farm company jackets drunker than hell driving a stolen car w/o insurance and they get let out the next day. I’ve got friends at the jail and family who are attorneys and, by a large margin, they get much lighter punishment for the same crime as do native Lexingtonians.

As a California native who has lived over 50 years in Southern California, I can say they are not in the shadows. They are receiving Cal Grants for college (financial aid) at the expense of citizens. They have taken over cities. They openly break laws and get away with it. I say push them back into the shadows.

The Left will never, certainly not now in their state of strutting and near-total dominion over politics and the culture, accept any bill that didn’t advance their interests and power. The idea that Rubio thinks he can cobble together a coalition based on some kind of shared notion of what’s good for America is so howlingly laughable that one wonders if Rubio is actually a pod person recently consumed by some alien force.

Reagan was able to get some of what he wanted from the Left because he held his popularity over them like a invisible cudgel cloaked in charm and because those were ancient days when democrats still held vestigial notions of a common good and the importance of economic growth or of political self interest subject to external pressures outside their control. But as they see it, nothing is outside their control now. They control EVERYTHING. There is no pressure. We have no Reagan, or anybody who can wield substantial public influence. Whether or not the Left owns America completely yet, they think they do, and have good reason to think it. Why on earth would they compromise?

I can see the D’s arguing over the “path” on some reasonable grounds, even if others disagree with the path or whether or not there should be a path. But, to suggest that D’s will bend on enforcement because it “can be eroded over time” makes no rational sense at all to me.

Are we suggesting that Democrats are in favor of illegal immigration? Is that how this shakes out? Are they willing to stand up and say so?

Bottom line, this is not immigration “reform” we’re talking about. It’s about illegal immigration. I’ve never heard a Republican oppose immigration. It’s ludicrous. Yet, when Schumer and others oppose enforcement of existing immigration statutes, they are, I suppose, saying they favor illegal immigration. Could we find a Republican who might be willing to make this point instead of continuously playing panicked defense?

As for Rubio’s 2016 prospects, I think the bill failing would actually be the best of both worlds for him. He’s given cover with Latino and liberal voters(and Univision) as he can say he led on the issue, but the support simply wasn’t there. And conservatives will forgive him since the thing ultimately didn’t pass and he did seem adamant about securing the border first.

Doughboy on January 30, 2013 at 4:01 PM

No.. Actually, the bill not passing would really hurt him in 2016. Rubio is in desperate need of actual accomplishments, especially since Ryan, Jindal, Christie, etc. have pretty significant accomplishments to their names. I could tell you what Ryan’s platform will be (debt crisis combined with Kemp 2.0 poverty stuff), Christie’s “bi-partisan” governor(same as probably Jindal’s). Not sure what Rubio’s would be. I’m thinking that the immigration reform along with swiping some of Ryan’s ideas on fighting poverty might be a good rationale. Without the immigration reform package, then Rubio’s main qualifications are giving pretty speeches and being a minority and that only works when you’re a Democrat.

President Jugears spilled the beans in his Nevada campaign speech. His speechwriters probably didn’t think anybody would notice. But I noticed.

He said that we needed them to come in from the shadow economy. Yep, he said it — go to a mp3 of the speech and listen.

He wasn’t primarily talking about illegal aliens — he was talking about the John Galts among us. There are a lot more of them than even I suspected and they are screwing up the government’s numbers.

The smallest workforce since WW2 yet the indirect taxes from sales of gasoline and similar items are close to normal levels. But the key thing is the gun buyback programs. Every one of them has turned into a street corner gun show with gun buyers with suitcases full of cash buying guns from people standing in line to turn in their weapons for a gift card from the cops.

They are stunned that the economy isn’t crushed despite their efforts. The answer is — going Galt. They need the immigration bill to root out the ones they don’t care about (braceros and other little people). Then everybody who is left in the shadows is either a tea partier, libertarian, or a criminal.

They will use the comprehensive immigration law to cover them going hunting dropouts from the system.

That is why it’s urgent — the official economy (with its 16 trillion) is about to collapse because TOO MANY PEOPLE have dropped out. The death spiral is about to go full throttle and the commies know that the backlash will end up rooting out most of the traitors IF THEY DON’T FIND SOMEONE TO BLAME BEFOREHAND.

Lock and load. And stockpile. There is little time left. Rubio is a useful idiot to the traitors.

^ I’d like to add that unless the person has committed a felony deportation or long term incarceration never even enters the conversation. I doubt the local PD even has the phone # for INS/ICE. It’s brutal… These horse farms used to provide decent jobs for actual taxpaying citizens. Total bs if you ask me.

I’m on Team Let It Burn, not Team Nuclear Armageddon. Let’s allow Obama to have his tax and spend binge, but let’s not reshape the electorate to the point where conservatives will never be in power again no matter how badly the Dems F up the country.

Doughboy on January 30, 2013 at 4:04 PM

Yup. Actually a critical component is E-Verify.
Let E-Verirfy be in place for 5 or more years before we even consider amnesty. Most would go home, and so we can then consider amnesty. Then, and only then.

Some say, oh, with E-VERIFY then (illegal) workers would flee. But unemployment is 9%. Non-illegals will pick up the slack. Please. Don’t mortgage our future to Mexico for temporary cheap labor. Before long we are going to be doing full out redistribution to this “cheap” labor, through Obamacare, Education, entitlements, and straight out asset theft via a Wealth Tax. And then it’s not cheap anymore, as our very property is up for the grabbing, for “the public good,” as was the rationale for confiscating property in East Germany.

I t is not employers’ responsibility to enforce feral law. In fact, this feral government allied with an invading nation to take Arizona to court to argue that the state, itself, was not allowed to enforce feral law.

and border enforcement and agree to revisit the issue in 5 years.

hopeful on January 30, 2013 at 4:33 PM

Border enforcement is pretty meaningless without interior enforcement, which is the thing that all these worms absolutely refuse to do (but claim they will …. “next time”). The whole charade of “closing the border” is just that. We have tens of millions of aliens come through the US legally on tourist visas and longer term permits. It is simple for millions of them to just decide to stay and to fill us up with more illegals any time and they don’t have to illegally crawl over any border. IT IS ALL ABOUT INTERIOR INFORCEMENT. Without that, the rest is just a sick joke.

If I hear one more Politician use the term “immigrants coming out of the shadows” I’m going to hurl.

portlandon on January 30, 2013 at 4:20 PM

Did you catch that clip of the recent CNN forum on immigration reform? The CNN guy asks the illegals in the audience to raise their hands, and they did (one person raised both hands — high).

Good demonstration of how very “fearful” illegals are of being discovered — they’re so terrified that they’re willing to go on t.v. and out themselves. And what reason would they have to be hiding “in the shadows” in the first place? Obama refuses to enforce immigration laws, and the only people his administration is deporting are violent felons. So unless an illegal alien is also a violent criminal, he or she has no reason to be “in the shadows.”

Come on guys, self identify if you jumped on the Rubio is the next conservative superstar! We would like to know.

astonerii on January 30, 2013 at 4:26 PM

Me.

Thank goodness individuals can have differences on various issues and don’t have to past a Purity Test ™ or something.

John the Libertarian on January 30, 2013 at 4:29 PM

Apparently it is a good thing you can live with the mental deficiency you possess.
I talked about how he is not some superstar, not that he is impure and needs to be gotten rid of.
So, you see Rubio as some superstar awesome going to change America for the better politician?
Noted… Thanks for the self identify. It shows reasonably good character.

No.. Actually, the bill not passing would really hurt him in 2016. Rubio is in desperate need of actual accomplishments, especially since Ryan, Jindal, Christie, etc. have pretty significant accomplishments to their names. I could tell you what Ryan’s platform will be (debt crisis combined with Kemp 2.0 poverty stuff), Christie’s “bi-partisan” governor(same as probably Jindal’s). Not sure what Rubio’s would be. I’m thinking that the immigration reform along with swiping some of Ryan’s ideas on fighting poverty might be a good rationale. Without the immigration reform package, then Rubio’s main qualifications are giving pretty speeches and being a minority and that only works when you’re a Democrat.

Illinidiva on January 30, 2013 at 4:35 PM

Well ok, no argument there. In fact that’s been my biggest problem with Rubio as the 2016 nominee. It’s our version of Obama. A one-term Senator who’s great on the stump who emerges from the primary only because of his ethnicity. Granted, Rubio is a conservative who loves America, so he’d be 1000 times better as President than Obama. But ideally, it would be nice to have a nominee with a genuine conservative record under his or her belt and not “just words, just speeches”.

We were hit hard by ROMNEY’s election loss. We were dazed, stumbling around, thinking that we had no choice but to agree to everything the Dems want.
Not even. The problem with Romney was largely that he didn’t take a conspicuous stand on issues like immigration. We could have won on that issue. Instead we lost with stupid Romney. Remember the missing white vote?
But now we can take a stand on immigration. We can’t do it silently like Romney attempted to do. We have to get mad, and get vocal, and face down those that try to tar and feather us as racist for standing up for the law and for not giving our country away to Mexico. Because the majority is very upset about illegal immigration, and will support us. But we cannot continue to try to be silent and shirk the issue anymore. Get mad, get vocal, point out the costs and threat to our very society.
And whatever, insist on E-Verify, immediately.

If you think the GOP suffers from chronically poor messaging, as basically every conservative does, then take some comfort in the fact that this guy knows what he’s doing on that front even if you oppose his goal.

If only he was working on behalf of the right cause, like debt/spending reduction. Shame he’s blowing up his credibility with the base on this issue.

Not that I’m too sad, as my dream candidate for 2016 is Mike Pence.

It does appear overall that opinion is beginning to coalesce against this mess, much to my surprise. I suspect that the repeated hammering of “we will be creating 11 million (and likely 30 million) new Democrat voters” message may finally beginning to cause the light bulbs to finally turn on in some segments of the GOP.

Wait, whats Coulter whining about? Wasnt she in love with christie then romney?

Well ok, no argument there. In fact that’s been my biggest problem with Rubio as the 2016 nominee. It’s our version of Obama.

You dont want a conservative Obama? I dont know what to say to that. But the biggest challenger to Rubio in 2016 primaries is Christie and I dont see him gaining much after NH. But it’s a long time from now.

Not even. The problem with Romney was largely that he didn’t take a conspicuous stand on issues like immigration. We could have won on that issue. Instead we lost with stupid Romney. Remember the missing white vote?

Immigration is a net loser for Republicans. It makes them look like angry white men. The issue for future elections is that the Republican party has run out of Caucasian Americans to court. Obama won less than 40% of the white vote in 2012 and lost independents by 5% and he still won by about 4%. If the Republican Party wants to remain politically viable, then they better find some way to court the Latino and Asian communities.

Can we please have a grown-up for our next President/crop of Pres. candidates?

Didn’t this woefully ignorant population already swoon for one eager beaver with minority appeal punching a Senate ticket on the way to bigger and better things.

If you object to the “ignorant” bit, please explain what else to call a population about 50% of whom can’t identify how many US Senators their state has, what the general condition of the economy or US fiscal health is (just within a galaxy or so of approximation), and who thinks that Obama is a nice guy and gifted speaker instead of a racially divisive, clinically narcissistic, adolescent with an impoverished knowledge and skills base.

No.. Actually, the bill not passing would really hurt him in 2016. Rubio is in desperate need of actual accomplishments, especially since Ryan, Jindal, Christie, etc. have pretty significant accomplishments to their names.

No he doesnt need anything to pass. Apparently you havent learned anything about elections in the past decade. Nobody cares about “accomplishments”. Ryan cant carry Wisconsin and Christie is a blowhard.

Well since Romney got the idiots here singing his praises, that wont be too hard. “Like a dog that returns to his vomit is a fool who repeats his folly.”

Flapjackmaka on January 30, 2013 at 4:58 PM

Romney never had the base. The primary turnout was depressed and a chunk of the base appears to have sat at home, despite a lot of noisemaking on this site about how he was the “next Reagan.” Rather than moving to the left to try to court Democrats, the GOP is going to have to reconnect with its base or face total dissolution as a party as more and more of them stay at home. Winning independents in 2012 was not good enough for the GOP to cover losing the base.

Conservatives have threatened to stay at home for a long time, but 2012 appears to be the first election where they really made good on that threat.

James Antle makes a good point too in noting that none of Rubio’s would-be rivals for the nomination have attacked him on this yet.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) are bumping elbows as both work to establish leadership roles on immigration and education reform while weighing 2016 presidential bids.

Bush on Friday appeared to criticize Rubio’s strategy for overhauling the nation’s immigration laws through a series of small bills instead of a comprehensive package as “shortsighted and self-defeating,” although he did not name Rubio.